CORAM
OBASEKI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
ESO, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
UWAIS, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
KAZEEM, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
NNAMANI, JUSTICE, SUPREME COURT
PARTIES
HENRY STEPHENS ENGINEERING CO. LTD
APPELLANTS
COMPLETE HOME ENTERPRISES NIG. LTD
RESPONDENTS
AREA(S) OF LAW
CONTRACT-BREACH-COUNTER CLAIM
SUMMARY OF FACTS
The appellant had sold various machinery to defendant and sought an order of court directing the respondents to pay up its balance
HELD
The Court dismissed the appellants appeal and the respondents cross appeal
ISSUES
Whether the Court of Appeal erred in law in quashing the order for payment of N2, 000.00 per month by the respondent
Whether the court can make a valid order where the application to it was made under a wrong statute
RATIONES DECIDENDI
EFFECT OF SEEKING A REMEDY UNDER A WRONG LAW
“In our view, if a relief or remedy is provided for by any written law (or by common law or in equity for that matter), that relief or remedy, if properly claimed by the partly seeking it, cannot be denied to the applicant simply because he has applied for it under the wrong law. To do so would be patently unjust.”- UWAIS, JSC.
CASES CITED
1. Joseph Falobi v. Elizabeth Falobi, (1976) N.M.L.R. 169 at p.177; (1976) 9 S.C.1 at p.13
STATUTES REFERRED TO
1. English Sale of Goods Act, 1893
2. Sale of Goods Law, Cap. 125